<meta name="robots" content="noindex">
Department of
SOCIAL SERVICES

Community Care Licensing


COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION REPORT

Facility Number: 342701122
Report Date: 07/23/2024
Date Signed: 07/23/2024 05:58:35 PM

Unsubstantiated


STATE OF CALIFORNIA - HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY

COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION REPORT
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
COMMUNITY CARE LICENSING DIVISION
SACRAMENTO SOUTH ASC, 9835 GOETHE ROAD, SUITE 100
SACRAMENTO, CA 95827
This is an official report of an unannounced visit/investigation of a complaint received in our office on
04/26/2024 and conducted by Evaluator Kimberly Viarella
COMPLAINT CONTROL NUMBER: 27-AS-20240426160535
FACILITY NAME:LEGACY OAKS OF SACRAMENTOFACILITY NUMBER:
342701122
ADMINISTRATOR:SYLVE, ASHLEYFACILITY TYPE:
740
ADDRESS:1922 MORSE AVENUETELEPHONE:
(916) 482-7745
CITY:SACRAMENTOSTATE: CAZIP CODE:
95825
CAPACITY:160CENSUS: DATE:
07/23/2024
UNANNOUNCEDTIME BEGAN:
12:00 PM
MET WITH:Ashley SylveTIME COMPLETED:
06:00 PM
ALLEGATION(S):
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Residents clothes were removed from room without consent.
INVESTIGATION FINDINGS:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
On 07/23/24, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kimberly Viarella made an unannounced visit to this facility to deliver the findings of this complaint investigation. The LPA identified herself upon arrival, stated the purpose of the visit and asked to speak with the Designated Facility Administrator (DFA). LPA met with Ashley Sylve, the Executive Director, as well as DFA and a brief interview followed.

The LPA toured the facility and observed 4 residents sitting in the lobby area conversing, 1 resident sitting at a small desk in the activities lounge working on their laptop, and a Bingo game finishing up. LPA also saw a housekeeper servicing a resident's room, and a caregiver escorting a resident down the hall. This LPA also observed approximately 20 residents lined up in front of the dining room for dinner and chatting with one another. LPA observed 4 caregivers and a Med Tech in Memory Care. No activities were observed in Memory Care during this visit.

Regarding the allegation: “Residents clothes were removed from room without consent.”
Unsubstantiated
Estimated Days of Completion:
SUPERVISOR'S NAME: Stephen RichardsonTELEPHONE: (916) 263-4746
LICENSING EVALUATOR NAME: Kimberly ViarellaTELEPHONE: (916) 809-5764
LICENSING EVALUATOR SIGNATURE:

DATE: 07/23/2024
I acknowledge receipt of this form and understand my licensing appeal rights as explained and received.
FACILITY REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE:

DATE: 07/23/2024
This report must be available at Child Care and Group Home facilities for public review for 3 years.
LIC9099 (FAS) - (06/04)
Page: 1 of 4
Control Number 27-AS-20240426160535
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY

COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION REPORT (Cont)
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
COMMUNITY CARE LICENSING DIVISION
SACRAMENTO SOUTH ASC, 9835 GOETHE ROAD, SUITE 100
SACRAMENTO, CA 95827
FACILITY NAME: LEGACY OAKS OF SACRAMENTO
FACILITY NUMBER: 342701122
VISIT DATE: 07/23/2024
NARRATIVE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
According to interviews, the facility did not do the resident's (R1’s) laundry at the request of the responsible party. The responsible party moved R1’s laundry to the lower cabinet of the kitchenette area to prevent other residents from wearing R1’s clothes and to keep R1’s clothes from being lost or misplaced. The responsible party stated that they posted a sign alerting care staff and housekeeping not to touch R1’s laundry. Through interviews, this LPA confirmed that staff (S1), (S2), (S3), and (S4) observed the sign and did not take R1’s laundry as they knew R1's responsible party would be visiting the facility and taking the laundry home with them to wash it there. During staff interviews with (S2) and (S4) this LPA learned that the responsible party did not follow the facility policy of entering from the front and signing in at the Concierge Desk. According to an interview with the Memory Care Director, a staff member (unknown) provided the responsible party with the code to the back entrance of Memory Care from the parking lot. S4 spoke to the responsible party about signing in at the front, as that was the policy, and the responsible party refused. The responsible party went to the Director of Memory Care and told the Director to let the staff know that they did not have to sign in at the front. The Director confirmed that S2 was correct and that going forward the responsible party needed to sign in upon arrival. Prior to this event (date unknown) the administration was unaware of the responsible party’s presence in the building as they were entering and exiting directly from Memory Care. The Executive Director stated that the pass code to the Memory Care rear exit was changed to prevent unauthorized use on or after 03/26/24.

According to the Executive Director, she was informed on 03/25/24 that most of R1’s clothes were missing. The responsible party presented her with 10 receipts from Sam’s Club totaling $433.42 for clothing that the responsible party said was for R1. These receipts dated from 11/22/22 to 12/14/23. According to staff (S2), (S3), and (S4) at no point during R1’s stay at Legacy Oaks did R1’s responsible party request that R1’s personal inventory be updated to include any of these items.

The Executive Director launched an investigation to see if R1’s clothes could be located. A room-to-room search was conducted in Memory Care. Even though the reporting party had been doing R1’s laundry, housekeeping and care staff were questioned. The Director of Memory Care searched all of the laundry rooms in Assisted Living as well. None of R1’s belongings were found during any of these searches.

This LPA conducted her own investigation which included interviews and a review of records. Staff interviews confirmed that the responsible party did R1’s laundry and that staff knew not to take it to be cleaned. Of those interviewed, none stated that they had seen anyone other than the responsible party with R1’s clothing. LPA inquired if there was a lost and found or an area where clothes that were donated were stored. LPA was shown to room 47 where these items were stored and this LPA looked though each item to see if any were marked with R1’s initials. LPA could not locate any that had R1s initials.

SUPERVISOR'S NAME: Stephen RichardsonTELEPHONE: (916) 263-4746
LICENSING EVALUATOR NAME: Kimberly ViarellaTELEPHONE: (916) 809-5764
LICENSING EVALUATOR SIGNATURE:

DATE: 07/23/2024
I acknowledge receipt of this form and understand my licensing appeal rights as explained and received.
FACILITY REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE:

DATE: 07/23/2024
LIC9099 (FAS) - (06/04)
Page: 2 of 4
Control Number 27-AS-20240426160535
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY

COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION REPORT (Cont)
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
COMMUNITY CARE LICENSING DIVISION
SACRAMENTO SOUTH ASC, 9835 GOETHE ROAD, SUITE 100
SACRAMENTO, CA 95827
FACILITY NAME: LEGACY OAKS OF SACRAMENTO
FACILITY NUMBER: 342701122
VISIT DATE: 07/23/2024
NARRATIVE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
LPA reviewed the admission agreement for R1 which was signed and dated on 12/02/22 by the responsible party and the Assistant Executive Director, Alicia Duchine. On page 13 of the agreement, it stated the following regarding theft and loss.

“This community provides all reasonable precautions to safeguard resident’s personal property. Upon moving in, Administrative Team, in cooperation with the resident and/or Resident’s family members, shall complete a personal inventory of resident’s personal and valuable items. As resident accumulates new items or discards items listed on the inventory form, Resident has an obligation to review form with Community team members to assure form is correct and complete. It is the Resident’s own responsibility to arrange for insurance for personal items if such coverage is desired. The Community shall not be responsible for the loss of any personal property belonging to the resident due to theft, fire, or any cause unless the loss or damage was caused by negligence of the Community or its employees. The resident is liable for any damages to the Community’s property caused by the Resident or the Resident’s guest or invitee’s, outside of normal wear and tear. In the event of theft or loss, the care team shall complete an investigation and verification process. The Community will make reasonable efforts to locate items lost or stolen when reported by resident or responsible party. Any reimbursement, as determined by the Administrator and as a result of investigation. A review of R1’s records revealed that on 12/05/22, when R1 moved into the facility, the RP signed a blank inventory sheet. Directly above the signature line it stated the following.

“I have received a copy of the Health and Safety Code Sections 1569.152, 1569.153, and 1569.154 and am acquainted with the facilities personal property safeguard procedures.”

Section 1569.153(d) states “A written resident personal property inventory is established upon admission and retained during the resident's stay in the residential care facility for the elderly. Inventories shall be written in ink, witnessed by the facility and the resident or resident's representative, and dated. A copy of the written inventory shall be provided to the resident or the person acting on the resident's behalf. All additions to an inventory shall be made in ink, and shall be witnessed by the facility and the resident or resident's representative, and dated. Subsequent items brought into or removed from the facility shall be added to or deleted from the personal property inventory by the facility at the written request of the resident, the resident's family, a responsible party, or a person acting on behalf of a resident. The facility shall not be liable for items which have not been requested to be included in the inventory or for items which have been deleted from the inventory. A copy of a current inventory shall be made available upon request to the

SUPERVISOR'S NAME: Stephen RichardsonTELEPHONE: (916) 263-4746
LICENSING EVALUATOR NAME: Kimberly ViarellaTELEPHONE: (916) 809-5764
LICENSING EVALUATOR SIGNATURE:

DATE: 07/23/2024
I acknowledge receipt of this form and understand my licensing appeal rights as explained and received.
FACILITY REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE:

DATE: 07/23/2024
LIC9099 (FAS) - (06/04)
Page: 3 of 4
Control Number 27-AS-20240426160535
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY

COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION REPORT (Cont)
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
COMMUNITY CARE LICENSING DIVISION
SACRAMENTO SOUTH ASC, 9835 GOETHE ROAD, SUITE 100
SACRAMENTO, CA 95827
FACILITY NAME: LEGACY OAKS OF SACRAMENTO
FACILITY NUMBER: 342701122
VISIT DATE: 07/23/2024
NARRATIVE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
resident, responsible party, or other authorized representative. The resident, resident's family, or a responsible party may list those items which are not subject to addition or deletion from the inventory, such as personal clothing or laundry, which are subject to frequent removal from the facility.”

LPA reviewed the inventory sheet that was signed by the responsible party when the resident’s belongings were moved out. There were 2 entries; on 03/25/24 a table and with chairs was removed and on 04/04/24, a dresser was removed. Both entries had the responsible party’s initials as well as the Executive Director’s. There were no other items listed on the inventory as being present, or being removed from R1’s room.

Based on observations, interviews and a review of records, it could not be determined who removed R1’s clothing. The facility did it’s due diligence by initiating its own investigation and Community Care Licensing conducted a second investigation upon receiving this complaint.

The standard for the preponderance of evidence has not been met, the department finds the allegation, “Residents clothes were removed from room without consent” to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. A finding of unsubstantiated means although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED.

According to California Code of Regulations, Title 22, no deficiencies were observed or cited during today's visit. A copy of this report has been provided and an exit interview was conducted with the Executive Director.

SUPERVISOR'S NAME: Stephen RichardsonTELEPHONE: (916) 263-4746
LICENSING EVALUATOR NAME: Kimberly ViarellaTELEPHONE: (916) 809-5764
LICENSING EVALUATOR SIGNATURE:

DATE: 07/23/2024
I acknowledge receipt of this form and understand my licensing appeal rights as explained and received.
FACILITY REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE:

DATE: 07/23/2024
LIC9099 (FAS) - (06/04)
Page: 4 of 4